PhilGlass wrote:I am the first to disagree with guilty without a trial, but in this case there is no need.The stories are accepted as gospel truth because the evidence is gospel.

Circular arguments generally do not (and should not) stand up in court.

I fear you may have misinterpreted the meaning of my original replies and the implications of this form of "journalism".Trial by press (and that's what we're talking about here, not some recently deceased pederast) is as anti-democratic as you can get. There's nothing complicated about it. Unless I'm mistaken Savile was presumed guilty by the public within hours of accusations (accusations mind, not proof) being published. Threats of (or actual) graveyard desecration occurred straight away. I don't seek to defend Savile, child abuse of any kind is appalling and utterly reprehensible. What I'm saying is, this sort of instant acceptance and tacit approval of anything reported is very dangerous, and as anyone with a sense of history will acknowledge, far from unprecedented. At its core the entire episode is a calculated diversion, didn't take long for politicians to jump on the outrage bandwagon did it? And it sells product, big time. Advertising rates go through the roof.

As always, no offense mate, just a difference of opinion though i'm at a loss to say where, all i did was agree with your original premise for this topic.

I think I may owe you an apology Phil. This is a delicate subject so I'll get to the point. I stand firmly by my statements in principle, but it's becoming increasingly apparent that I spoke out of place. To be fair, without someone there to post publications & videos here, it's very difficult (in most cases impossible) to know what you folks are consuming as news. Websites, publications and broadcasts frequently and substantially edit content on a regional basis. I hope I didn't offend you mate, this sort of news item not only mobilizes (its primary intent) but polarizes critical public opinion as well. Change of subject, on a lighter note, are we gonna see another installment of your Steptoe piece? Keeping us all in a state of suspense is just cruel lolol. It is!! Where's part III of "The End of an Error"?

Dirty Old Yank wrote:I think I may owe you an apology Phil. This is a delicate subject so I'll get to the point. I stand firmly by my statements in principle, but it's becoming increasingly apparent that I spoke out of place. To be fair, without someone there to post publications & videos here, it's very difficult (in most cases impossible) to know what you folks are consuming as news. Websites, publications and broadcasts frequently and substantially edit content on a regional basis. I hope I didn't offend you mate, this sort of news item not only mobilizes (its primary intent) but polarizes critical public opinion as well. Change of subject, on a lighter note, are we gonna see another installment of your Steptoe piece? Keeping us all in a state of suspense is just cruel lolol. It is!! Where's part III of "The End of an Error"?

Hi mate

Firstly, you did not speak out of place and there is certainly no need whatsoever for any apology. I completely understood (what I think) your point (was). I think it's clear our news has been covering this differently, which seems rather expected. There is also evidence here, of police being paid off, police complaints etc, all covering a 40 year period. It has moved far beyond a posthumous slagging off - it is now proven Savile was even interviewed under caution but used his influence to wriggle out of it.

As for "The end of an error", It will be coming soon... I have had a lot of things going on lately - my health has led to various hospital visits - I've had cameras down places, up places and everything else! It's nothing that affects my daily functioning it's just time consuming. With that and a special lady entering my life, I don't have time to do much now, but this will come soon, I'm glad someone is interested!

Watched this Doc a few years back and wasn't very impressed. Yes, The actors were very good at imitating both Harold & Albert especially Phil Davis but my main crux was the portrayal of Harry H Corbett & Wilfrid Brambell's relationship which was used as a source to attack and to stir up malicious rumours especially of Harry that he was a ill tempered womaniser. The language was uncalled for too and both actors couldn't answer back at the inaccurate portayal of themselves and their families versions of events were ignored by the BBC. The BBC did the same with the Carry on biopic Cor Blimey too a few years back also about cast relationships having no feeling for the casts families still alive.